- 4,107
- 4,043
excellent article on the concerns of this thread. The animated graphic featured is pretty fucking disgusting, if I gave a fuck any more.
(my option -- not giving a fuck -- is probably largely because I don't have kids. Think about that. If I had kids...)
www.nytimes.com
edit: money shot
edit: kids. I have a great dog, a chow-schipperke mix. Rescue. 10 yrs old. If I thought my actions could negatively impact my dog, I do not want to bring harm to my dog, certainly. My dog. I am imagining -- and correct me if I've gone off the rails here -- if I had kids or family who could "suffer harm and or hassle" because of something I did, my mindset on this changes into a whole diff mode. So I get the concern. Respect! Not shitposting! This, if I cared, is inappropriate harm or fear of harm which I think is clearly intended to be protected by our fundamental rights. "Unreasonable search and seizure" means I do not have to be fucking afraid the thugs are going to ransack the place and cart me off.
This surveillance era makes that legally-rooted feeling of peace and quiet, disappear. Keep on fellows. When I find something interesting I'll pop it in.
edit 2: removed some curse words. this site is not helping my many-years old resolution to stop talking like I was still 17 and living in Long Island.
EDIT 3: I think the case should be clear-cut. Everything FB, Twitter, Amazon, Verizon, etc., has collected has been for commercial purposes. That is an extra-legal activity that is subject to law but is otherwise, about as much the gov'ts business as what you do in your kitchen.
Analogy. Imagine, if the government discovered that businesses, for purposes of business, were able to trace your fingerprints on dollar bills and inserted atm cards, and somehow generate from that useful trails of your shopping habits, places, etc.
I do not see how it is not a massive Bill of Rights case as to whether the government has any sort of easy right to simply "contract" that data. I should not be signing off to the government what I have merely signed off to a business. At this scale it is absurd to think our system of rights "assumes" you do.
In old ovies the cop always had to sneak a look at the hotel's sign-in book to see what room the perp was in. Sneak. Or warrant buddy. This is that, really.
(my option -- not giving a fuck -- is probably largely because I don't have kids. Think about that. If I had kids...)
Opinion | They Stormed the Capitol. Their Apps Tracked Them. (Published 2021)
Times Opinion was able to identify individuals from a trove of leaked smartphone location data.
edit: money shot
edit: kids. I have a great dog, a chow-schipperke mix. Rescue. 10 yrs old. If I thought my actions could negatively impact my dog, I do not want to bring harm to my dog, certainly. My dog. I am imagining -- and correct me if I've gone off the rails here -- if I had kids or family who could "suffer harm and or hassle" because of something I did, my mindset on this changes into a whole diff mode. So I get the concern. Respect! Not shitposting! This, if I cared, is inappropriate harm or fear of harm which I think is clearly intended to be protected by our fundamental rights. "Unreasonable search and seizure" means I do not have to be fucking afraid the thugs are going to ransack the place and cart me off.
This surveillance era makes that legally-rooted feeling of peace and quiet, disappear. Keep on fellows. When I find something interesting I'll pop it in.
edit 2: removed some curse words. this site is not helping my many-years old resolution to stop talking like I was still 17 and living in Long Island.
EDIT 3: I think the case should be clear-cut. Everything FB, Twitter, Amazon, Verizon, etc., has collected has been for commercial purposes. That is an extra-legal activity that is subject to law but is otherwise, about as much the gov'ts business as what you do in your kitchen.
Analogy. Imagine, if the government discovered that businesses, for purposes of business, were able to trace your fingerprints on dollar bills and inserted atm cards, and somehow generate from that useful trails of your shopping habits, places, etc.
I do not see how it is not a massive Bill of Rights case as to whether the government has any sort of easy right to simply "contract" that data. I should not be signing off to the government what I have merely signed off to a business. At this scale it is absurd to think our system of rights "assumes" you do.
In old ovies the cop always had to sneak a look at the hotel's sign-in book to see what room the perp was in. Sneak. Or warrant buddy. This is that, really.
Last edited:
- 1
